Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2018 17:24:56 GMT -8
The newsletter is now online with important Icons of Steam information and a nerf launch for New Haven fans |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Sept 22, 2018 18:04:48 GMT -8
Kudos to Jason, he almost makes me want to buy a Royal Hudson myself. Almost. It looks fantastic and a great icon of Canadian steam.
|
|
|
|
Post by sd40dash2 on Sept 22, 2018 18:18:10 GMT -8
Thanks for the link.
P.S. Is that you Jason? Lots of postings lately from this "gerald" ID, most of them about Rapido.
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Sept 22, 2018 18:44:17 GMT -8
I don't use pseudonyms, so Gerald isn't me. But we are always grateful for any support we can get!
-Jason
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 6:45:25 GMT -8
Thanks for the link. P.S. Is that you Jason? Lots of postings lately from this "gerald" ID, most of them about Rapido. No, not associated with Rapido in any way other than interested in the Icons of Stream succeeding. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 7:13:33 GMT -8
I vote for the 2-8-0 to be moved up in production...and the Roberval and Saguenay #17 be on the list...It's a Canadian Locomotive Company engine...built in 1940. Of course, this engine is basically a self-serving request; as it became the Crab Orchard and Egytian's #17; running until 1987. #17 was the LAST steam engine used in common-carrier freight service in the US. She sits in Boone, Iowa today...so Rapido has a perfect subject to scan and get the dimensions correct. CO&E #17At any rate, the Icon's of steam is a great project...but I am also longing for a correct B23-7 and B30-7A for the MoPac!!! |
|
|
|
Post by SOMECALLMETIM on Sept 23, 2018 9:54:48 GMT -8
I for one am happy with the delay in orders for the FPA-2 locomotives as it gives me time to decide if I want to a passenger train outside of my era of modeling. If I can find a specific Walthers baggage car, I would be 2/3 if the way there with the FPA-2. All I need would be a scratch built combine.
|
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Sept 23, 2018 10:48:15 GMT -8
I read Jason's item on the Icons of Canadian Steam project and have to say I'm disappointed with the decision to make the H1a/b Hudson the next release. I'm waiting for the smaller mixed-service steam locomotives, specifically the CP/CN Ten-Wheelers and the CN Consolidation.
While the H1a/b is certainly a desirable locomotive it is still not one likely to be seen on way-freights or branchline passenger trains. I think this is where there is a definite void in accurate Canadian steam models and I believe the smaller locomotives will sell very well.
I recognize the business reason put forward but to judge the overall interest in all the other locos in the IoCS series by the sales of the Royal Hudson is likely misleading. The Royal Hudson is not a model everyone wants to have, especially if they don't run mainline passenger trains. I'm not willing to buy one just to show my interest in the the smaller locomotives.
I think many people have been sitting waiting to see if Rapido could produce a credible steam locomotive model. Now they have produced two so I think that question has been answered with a resounding yes.
Rapido's speculating on future IofCS models based on Royal Hudson sales is not helpful. The only fair way to gauge the sales potential of the other IofCS models is to open the order books and see what the response is. Let modelers show their interest with orders even if there must be caveats about delivery dates and prices. As it stands now we have no way to register our interest in having these models produced.
I hope Rapido will re-consider the future of the other IoCS models.
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Sept 23, 2018 13:41:36 GMT -8
I read Jason's item on the Icons of Canadian Steam project and have to say I'm disappointed with the decision to make the H1a/b Hudson the next release. I'm waiting for the smaller mixed-service steam locomotives, specifically the CP/CN Ten-Wheelers and the CN Consolidation. While the H1a/b is certainly a desirable locomotive it is still not one likely to be seen on way-freights or branchline passenger trains. I think this is where there is a definite void in accurate Canadian steam models and I believe the smaller locomotives will sell very well. I recognize the business reason put forward but to judge the overall interest in all the other locos in the IoCS series by the sales of the Royal Hudson is likely misleading. The Royal Hudson is not a model everyone wants to have, especially if they don't run mainline passenger trains. I'm not willing to buy one just to show my interest in the the smaller locomotives. I think many people have been sitting waiting to see if Rapido could produce a credible steam locomotive model. Now they have produced two so I think that question has been answered with a resounding yes. Rapido's speculating on future IofCS models based on Royal Hudson sales is not helpful. The only fair way to gauge the sales potential of the other IofCS models is to open the order books and see what the response is. Let modelers show their interest with orders even if there must be caveats about delivery dates and prices. As it stands now we have no way to register our interest in having these models produced. I hope Rapido will re-consider the future of the other IoCS models. Hi David, It's not all doom and gloom! We're still optimistic that the steam program will proceed with most or all of the announced engines, though the release order will likely be scrambled further. It's a question of financing the tooling. This is what I alluded to in the newsletter. If a steam engine costs twice as much as a diesel but brings in the same funds - and takes twice as long to develop - it eats up a huge chunk of our financing abilities. The trouble with taking orders for two or three steam engines right now is that the orders don't come in until the last week, and we won't close the order book three years before a model comes out. That would hurt us more than help us. The RDC is the most extreme example. In the last week we took orders for the first run, the order book tripled. So you can imagine how I felt for the entire year we took orders - "This project was a mistake, this project was a mistake, this project..." and then it blew past our projected sales by a huge amount. Even the second run RDC almost doubled our projected sales. But again - the vast majority of orders came in the last few days before the deadline. I'm going offline for the next two days, so hopefully Bill can chime in if the discussion continues. Best regards, Jason |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2018 13:48:52 GMT -8
I read Jason's item on the Icons of Canadian Steam project and have to say I'm disappointed with the decision to make the H1a/b Hudson the next release. I'm waiting for the smaller mixed-service steam locomotives, specifically the CP/CN Ten-Wheelers and the CN Consolidation. While the H1a/b is certainly a desirable locomotive it is still not one likely to be seen on way-freights or branchline passenger trains. I think this is where there is a definite void in accurate Canadian steam models and I believe the smaller locomotives will sell very well. Well, during the somewhat popular transition era as steam was winding down the Hudson's, Royal or otherwise, were used in freight service so I'm not sure the excuse that it is a passenger engine holds in the general sense (and that isn't even including the majority of the market who aren't concerned about fidelity to a prototype).
But (speaking as a consumer / observer who doesn't know one way or another) why should anyone think the smaller locos will sell better than the Hudson's? Looking at what is offered for the US market and Athearn doesn't offer anything small, and almost all of the Broadway offerings aren't what most of us would consider small engines. It definitely appears that at least for steam the market prefers bigger.
Another thought, in a hobby that is known for its chronic loco centric purchases, where most of us buy far more locos than our layouts (built or dreamed) could ever justify, why should we now assume things are different and people will only buy small branchline locos? And if true, will the 1 or 2 locos that these branchlines would need really create the sales numbers that are needed...
|
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Sept 23, 2018 18:44:20 GMT -8
Well, during the somewhat popular transition era as steam was winding down the Hudson's, Royal or otherwise, were used in freight service so I'm not sure the excuse that it is a passenger engine holds in the general sense (and that isn't even including the majority of the market who aren't concerned about fidelity to a prototype). Hi Gerald, I know that the Hudsons were used in freight service especially towards the last days of steam but they weren't seen on branch-lines pulling freight or passenger trains even at the end. Branch-lines were the domain of the Consolidations and Ten-Wheelers, occasionally a light Mikado or Pacific might be used. The track and bridge conditions of the branch most of the time prevented the use of larger power. (Time of year was also a factor.) Often the Consolidations and Ten-Wheelers had to be double-headed to move longer trains. There are other Consolidations and Ten-Wheelers on the market (Athearn, Broadway Limited, Bachmann) but there are none based on Canadian prototypes. I hope we'll see some from Rapido sooner rather than later. |
|
|
|
Post by canrailfan on Sept 23, 2018 19:14:59 GMT -8
Hi David, It's not all doom and gloom! We're still optimistic that the steam program will proceed with most or all of the announced engines, though the release order will likely be scrambled further. It's a question of financing the tooling. This is what I alluded to in the newsletter. If a steam engine costs twice as much as a diesel but brings in the same funds - and takes twice as long to develop - it eats up a huge chunk of our financing abilities. The trouble with taking orders for two or three steam engines right now is that the orders don't come in until the last week, and we won't close the order book three years before a model comes out. That would hurt us more than help us. The RDC is the most extreme example. In the last week we took orders for the first run, the order book tripled. So you can imagine how I felt for the entire year we took orders - "This project was a mistake, this project was a mistake, this project..." and then it blew past our projected sales by a huge amount. Even the second run RDC almost doubled our projected sales. But again - the vast majority of orders came in the last few days before the deadline. I'm going offline for the next two days, so hopefully Bill can chime in if the discussion continues. Best regards, Jason Hi Jason, Thanks for the reply. Having worked out the design of the Royal Hudson, would this suggest that developing further models might take less time (and money) in the future? Or do you see each individual model starting from 'square 1' in development? I understand your experience with the RDCs and I believe this also happened to some extent with the SW1200RS project. My thought is that as it stands now, Rapido can only gaze into a crystal ball and try to imagine what the demand might be for the various IofCS models. I know I'm not the only one waiting for the smaller locos. How do we help the crystal ball give Rapido an accurate picture of the interest in these models? Thanks, David [Hope your sukkah stays comfortable and dry!] |
|
|
|
Post by rapidobill on Sept 24, 2018 5:10:58 GMT -8
Having worked out the design of the Royal Hudson, would this suggest that developing further models might take less time (and money) in the future? Or do you see each individual model starting from 'square 1' in development? Hi David, I'll answer this one I guess as the Hudson design landed largely on my desk... It depends.  Looking at the CP steam locos there is some commonality in parts. So, like CP did, we can re-use some smaller components (wheels, stacks, headlights, etc) in a new design and some larger assemblies (tenders) between locos. However, each loco is still largely a stand-alone project. Part of the choice to move the H1a/b up in the order - as Jason has noted - is that many large chunks of the Royal transfer largely intact to the "Standard" so development time will be less (I'm well into it now). Were we to do a 2-8-0 (fro example) next then we would be pretty much back to square one. Bill Schneider |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2018 15:31:49 GMT -8
I know that the Hudsons were used in freight service especially towards the last days of steam but they weren't seen on branch-lines pulling freight or passenger trains even at the end. Branch-lines were the domain of the Consolidations and Ten-Wheelers, occasionally a light Mikado or Pacific might be used. The track and bridge conditions of the branch most of the time prevented the use of larger power. (Time of year was also a factor.) Often the Consolidations and Ten-Wheelers had to be double-headed to move longer trains. But how many people are modelling branch lines - or more specifically modelling branch lines accurately?
The market, in general, like big engines, multiple engines, and doesn't care that the layout they are running on is unrealistic.
"We" like to model engine terminals, so we can show off / use the too many locomotives we have bought, where a Hudson could fit right in.
Thus claiming that the Hudson's won't sell because they weren't used on freight, or because they weren't used on branchlines, is a bit of a red herring. Because if the market for the Rapido steam locos is only those people who are accurately modelling branchlines then effectively there is no market.
|
|
|
|
Post by talltim on Sept 24, 2018 23:51:29 GMT -8
Having worked out the design of the Royal Hudson, would this suggest that developing further models might take less time (and money) in the future? Or do you see each individual model starting from 'square 1' in development? Hi David, I'll answer this one I guess as the Hudson design landed largely on my desk... It depends. Looking at the CP steam locos there is some commonality in parts. So, like CP did, we can re-use some smaller components (wheels, stacks, headlights, etc) in a new design and some larger assemblies (tenders) between locos. However, each loco is still largely a stand-alone project. Part of the choice to move the H1a/b up in the order - as Jason has noted - is that many large chunks of the Royal transfer largely intact to the "Standard" so development time will be less (I'm well into it now). Were we to do a 2-8-0 (fro example) next then we would be pretty much back to square one. Bill Schneider I got the impression that the question was more about design principles than commonality of parts. Presumably once you get a handle on what makes a steam chassis work you can transfer those ideas onto the next loco even if it shares no parts. Similarly once you have worked out then best ways to split the body components for ease of production and assembly you can then take those ideas forward. |
|
|
|
Post by rapidobill on Sept 25, 2018 6:09:43 GMT -8
I got the impression that the question was more about design principles than commonality of parts. Presumably once you get a handle on what makes a steam chassis work you can transfer those ideas onto the next loco even if it shares no parts. Similarly once you have worked out then best ways to split the body components for ease of production and assembly you can then take those ideas forward. "...ease of production..." There's a phrase that's seldom used with a Rapido project! Dan Darnell and I are both steam-era modelers and have a fair bit of experience between us with various steam models. For the Hudson I sat down with the factory engineers (who also have experience designing steam models) and discussed several options. Between the group of us we came up with the specifications that we wanted to use in the steam program, so yes - that time will not need to be spent again. However, every steam project will be different because of different configurations and available space to fit the components. In reality, this is no different than a diesel project in that regard. Although we've done many diesels over the years, each one is largely unique - unless we're able to reuse components - hence my comments. Bill |
|
klinn
New Member
Posts: 34 
|
Post by klinn on Sept 25, 2018 13:07:46 GMT -8
I'm interested in the smaller locos, specifically a CP Light Pacific, simply because I rode behind 1201 several times when it was doing the tourist run between Ottawa and Wakefield. Also chased it a few times to get more photos.  (note: that's my own shot, not the postcard that came out later, it's just a popular scenic location) I think there's a tendency to model what one has experienced, and those excursions formed the bulk of my experience with steam. |
|
leikec
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by leikec on Sept 26, 2018 7:17:58 GMT -8
I preordered the blue 1939 2850 Royal Hudson just because I like it, not because I'm strictly a Canadian prototype modeler. That's pretty much how I buy almost everything train related, and I suspect that a large number of Rapido's customers are just like me--they buy what they like, and many don't stick to just one prototype railroad. I will hopefully end up with two Royal Hudsons, but I can only afford to commit to one right now.
Rapido is by far my favorite manufacturer, so everything they produce gets my attention, and I'm just as likely to buy a double deck bus or a Sterling Single steam locomotive as I am to buy a Gtw or D&H passenger car.
Jeff C
|
|
|
|
Post by rapidotrains on Sept 28, 2018 11:15:53 GMT -8
I preordered the blue 1939 2850 Royal Hudson just because I like it, not because I'm strictly a Canadian prototype modeler. That's pretty much how I buy almost everything train related, and I suspect that a large number of Rapido's customers are just like me--they buy what they like, and many don't stick to just one prototype railroad. I will hopefully end up with two Royal Hudsons, but I can only afford to commit to one right now. Rapido is by far my favorite manufacturer, so everything they produce gets my attention, and I'm just as likely to buy a double deck bus or a Sterling Single steam locomotive as I am to buy a Gtw or D&H passenger car. Jeff C Thanks a lot for your support, Jeff. It means a lot to us! -Jason |
|
|
|
Post by tony on Sept 28, 2018 13:17:45 GMT -8
I bet some of those folks working in the Rapido factory would love to be working on some ACF, PS, Ortner, Greenville model replicas! Buses?
|
|
leikec
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by leikec on Sept 28, 2018 20:34:02 GMT -8
I bet some of those folks working in the Rapido factory would love to be working on some ACF, PS, Ortner, Greenville model replicas! Buses? And just think of the fun they would have painting up all of those On30 8-18c 4-4-0's  Jeff C |
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Sept 29, 2018 5:00:40 GMT -8
I bet some of those folks working in the Rapido factory would love to be working on some ACF, PS, Ortner, Greenville model replicas! Buses? I bet some of those folks working in the Rapido factory would love to be working on some ACF, PS, Ortner, Greenville model replicas! Buses? And just think of the fun they would have painting up all of those On30 8-18c 4-4-0's Jeff C Y'all are a bunch of sadists... |
|
leikec
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by leikec on Oct 1, 2018 8:11:58 GMT -8
I bet some of those folks working in the Rapido factory would love to be working on some ACF, PS, Ortner, Greenville model replicas! Buses? And just think of the fun they would have painting up all of those On30 8-18c 4-4-0's Jeff C Y'all are a bunch of sadists... Just trying to move things along.  On30 needs a decent 4-4-0, and the 8-18c was the GP7 of its day... Jeff C |
|
